Linux - NewsThis forum is for original Linux News. If you'd like to write content for LQ, feel free to contact us.
All threads in the forum need to be approved before they will appear.

Notices

Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.

You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!

Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.

Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.

Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide

This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.

The live CD challenge? I'm not 100% sure but I don't think Mepis was the first to offer this way of using Linux. Was Knoppix brought out before Mepis? I know that Knoppix wasn't the first either. Be interesting to find out which it was

I need to speak more clearly: not just a live CD (I was using Knoppix before MEPIS), but a live install CD, one that does both, no need to separate the 2 functions. I believe the MEPIS claim to that 1st may be correct.

<rant>
One of my pet peeves w/ Ubuntu, all their social conscience not withstanding, is that Mark Shuttleworth's fortune has distorted the market place. We cannot tell how much of the *buntus' popularity is due to technical merit & how much is due the same $$ effect that keeps Gates, Balmer, & M$ dominant.
</rant>

Hard to tell from where I'm sitting, but truthfully, 'word-of-mouth' (sortof) is where I learned about Ubuntu. I never paid much attention to people talking about this 'free' OS called Linux. Despite my frustration with Windows' lack of security and stability, I just couldn't, for the life of me, believe a free OS would work better than a paid-for OS that even had 'free' commercial support. But the rapidly-increasing number of people posting on Yahoo message boards in '06 about how good Ubuntu really works convinced me to try it. I'd never even heard of Shuttleworth or Canonical at that point. Technical merit would get my vote, as Ubuntu was easier to install on my "Built for Windows" box than Windows could ever hope to be. And of all the distros I've tried, it's still the only one that has installed without any problems.

I agree that it's all about choice. From my previous post, let me reiterate that although I prefer KDE, I think GNOME is a great DE. I think the developers of both DE's should be commended for such fantastic products.

I also wanted to mention that on GUI FTP apps, I prefer FileZilla. I like the layout of KFTPGrabber, but have had issues with it (files it says have been transferred really were not transferred).

Well... I'm currently in the process of installing Debian Lenny (todays latest release). I opted for a desktop environment even though this is a server (Compaq ML330e - old but it was free). At this stage in the release cycle, it could change upon proper full release, the DE is Gnome. I have to say I really like it. I'm installing KDE as well but may uninstall that at some future date. So, I'm open to change

I have to say I like the way Gnome actually 'words' some of its options. I understand the same thing in KDE but I think Gnome may have the edge on clarity.

I need to go and sit down now....me. liking Gnome this much... it's unheard of!!!

Distro: openSUSE. Call me weird, but I just don't like Ubuntu. I don't care for Kubuntu either. That's not to say they're bad distros, but I've always been a SUSE fan.

Desktop: Although KDE and GNOME are both great in their own ways, my pick is certainly KDE. GNOME is too simplistic and doesn't give me enough control and configurability. I like the look and feel of KDE.

Same here, since always: SUSE+KDE.
And I don't feel any shame in admitting that I have a strong dislike for Ubuntu: I'd never use, even if it were the last Linux distro.

Everyone certainly has a right to choose, but I'm just curious why you'd "never use Ubuntu, even if it were the last Linux distro". And what would you use, then?

Cheers

My thoughts entirely. I mean, would you then use Microsoft Windows? Exclusively!!! That to me would seem to be a case of cutting off one's nose to spite your face.

I'll admit that my first love affair with Linux was SuSE (9.1) to be precise. I had used Corel Linux and its successor Xandros (I was a beta tester before public release) fairly successfully prior to that release of SuSE. I then moved on up through SuSE 9.2 (bloody awful), 9.3 (excellent) then through the 10 series (10.2 was bad, is there something with the *.2 releases?). However, I then discovered Kubuntu after hearing all about this wonderful new Ubuntu distro. I still have SuSE 10.3 running on one PC
but it's rarely used now as I much prefer Kubuntu. I'm really starting to lean towards Debian and it's derivatives nowadays. Yesterday I successfully set up a server running Debian Lenny testing :-) This was new ground for me as I have never before set up a proper server. It still needs some work but it's good fun

very sad to think that if you distribute the most distro's that like microsoft you will be called the best.I guess more support and money makes the open source better. what can ubuntu do that slackware is unable to do.

very sad to think that if you distribute the most distro's that like microsoft you will be called the best.I guess more support and money makes the open source better. what can ubuntu do that slackware is unable to do.

Install on my system flawlessly without a lot of tweaking and configuring. Read my sig, then check which one I'm still using. So now, my questions are, 1) what can Slackware do that Ubuntu can't do? and 2) Why, when nothing else can be said against Ubuntu, does it get compared to Microsoft? Canonical rejected Microsoft's "deal" months ago, and it's still LINUX.

The whole idea behind Linux is the freedom of choice, and this type of in-fighting is exactly what the media is always reporting about as the cause for Linux never being able to go mainstream.

Install on my system flawlessly without a lot of tweaking and configuring. Read my sig, then check which one I'm still using. So now, my questions are, 1) what can Slackware do that Ubuntu can't do? and 2) Why, when nothing else can be said against Ubuntu, does it get compared to Microsoft? Canonical rejected Microsoft's "deal" months ago, and it's still LINUX.

The whole idea behind Linux is the freedom of choice, and this type of in-fighting is exactly what the media is always reporting about as the cause for Linux never being able to go mainstream.

Gone fishing my friend. sounds better then my click is better then yours.
must leave all computers at home even the cell phone.
just me a pole and a six pack of the good life lol